I don’t think anyone could argue with Pac-Mondrian!
For the same reason Portal and Bioshock aren’t: it isn’t a question of “which games are art?” or “what are the most artistically powerful/relevant/whatever recent games?” It is a question of looking at games that are made for the purpose of exploring something - like poetry written for sound, as you say - rather than to provide players with a significant amount of entertainment.
Just noodling around in Passage is kind of pointless and boring. But exploring the way in which the game is represents aspects of life and aging is an interesting experience.
Fugitive Hunter.
Wow. What an arrogant, self-absorbed prick you are.
You might want to expand your horizons a little.
I hate to end the love-fest we have had going for a couple of days, but how is he a prick for having an opinion about abstract art and games as art?
EDIT: I think a person can have relatively broad horizons and stil think abstract is shite.
Oregon Trail got across passage’s retarded arty meaning years ago.
Except the sound is as much the poetry as is the meaning. Otherwise, why not just write a 5 paragraph expository essay to express meaning?
Really? I think you’re creating a false equality of time investment. Even if it’s initially not clear, it only takes one play through to get the gist of Passage, which is only a few minutes. Also, there are elements replaying that may not be noticed the first time. The player is participating in an exploration of the author’s perspective on his life. The game itself is a process of discovery rather than something you win or lose. It doesn’t have to be 10-15 hours of complex decision making with the proper reward structures (You Win!). Actually, the simplified controls, limited interaction, and short length, allow the player to enjoy the discovery and the actual experience of the game rather than fussing over rules. The player isn’t wasting their time reading tooltips or trying to navigate arcane interfaces.
The Marriage works the same way. You’re exploring the rules (or universe) with the game, rather than just explicitly exploiting them.
Exactly.
I agree. It’s part of the reason I dropped out of the fine arts program. Strangely, most of my work is impressionistic or abstract. Though, it was less to do with “high art” being worthless and more to do with the realization that the world of fine art is just a game between artists and those who can afford (or who they can convince) to buy their work. I came out with a lot of respect for some relatively kooky artists though. Maybe it’s a wash.
But I think games can be artistic in the sense that they can express Process like nothing else. How one thing becomes another thing. Film can show you. You can read about it in a book. But in a game you can do it, over and over, from different angles until you utterly grok it. And the degree to which something is communicated or the choice of subjects and how they’re arranged does have artistic qualities.
Again I agree, but I think you’re unfairly lumping them in with meaningless “high art” salesmanship since most people making art games aren’t making money from them.
It’s as much how it expresses that meaning as the meaning itself that makes Passage interesting. I’d also consider it a different take on the similar themes. Passage explores: living, companionship (or lack thereof), memory, perspective and death all in that simple little game.
Honestly it seems like it really explored a reason to let old geezers go “hm blah blah blah blah blah”. I would have appreciated the message more if the score always read zero.
Excellent. See Anax, this is why Brian should not get his opinion tinkled upon before people (who actually have first-hand knowledge) have a chance to give replies or further opinions, which as it turns out may support his nutty, radical ideas about the legitimacy of some art. And by nutty and radical I mean a perfectly good opinion that I sometimes share.
EDITED: for clarification or further muddying. Your choice
[NeoGAF] SHADOW OF THE COLOSSUS!!![/NeoGAF]
What do you think “the message” is? Your focus on the score is surprising.
Rez
Are you being obtuse here? I was clearly talking about the jazz focused poets like Yusef Komunyakaa who used words exclusively to express sound, rhythm and emotion, with meaning as a distant tertiary goal, not poets like William Blake who focused on propagating meaning and used meter and rhyming to emphasize a particular element or add other qualities to their, for lack of a better word, message. I can’t believe that I had to spell that out to an Arts major.
Really? I think you’re creating a false equality of time investment. Even if it’s initially not clear, it only takes one play through to get the gist of Passage, which is only a few minutes. Also, there are elements replaying that may not be noticed the first time. The player is participating in an exploration of the author’s perspective on his life. The game itself is a process of discovery rather than something you win or lose. It doesn’t have to be 10-15 hours of complex decision making with the proper reward structures (You Win!). Actually, the simplified controls, limited interaction, and short length, allow the player to enjoy the discovery and the actual experience of the game rather than fussing over rules. The player isn’t wasting their time reading tooltips or trying to navigate arcane interfaces.
The Marriage works the same way. You’re exploring the rules (or universe) with the game, rather than just explicitly exploiting them.
I’m saying they sucked, okay? I’ve played better games when I made circles in MSPaint while bored and attempting to study. This isn’t a judgment call on whether they fail as art (which I’m of the opinion they do, but that’s a subjective call that I’ve got no right to make and no way to back up, especially since I like Dadaism), but whether they fail as games. Which they do. Abysmally. And I’ve got pretty low standards as to what makes me happy when it comes to gaming, “I’m still playing through NWN1’s OC and I don’t absolutely hate it” low standards.
Can a painting which is not a good painting be good art?
I assumed that’s what you meant, but my confusion came from your use of “game.” It seems to be making a distinction that doesn’t exist (or at least that I don’t see). It’s entirely possible I’m just being obtuse. I’m pretty tired right now, but even when I supposedly alert, it happens too frequently.
I’m saying they sucked, okay? I’ve played better games when I made circles in MSPaint while bored and attempting to study. This isn’t a judgment call on whether they fail as art (which I’m of the opinion they do, but that’s a subjective call that I’ve got no right to make and no way to back up, especially since I like Dadaism), but whether they fail as games. Which they do. Abysmally. And I’ve got pretty low standards as to what makes me happy when it comes to gaming, “I’m still playing through NWN1’s OC and I don’t absolutely hate it” low standards.
So you’re saying they fail to fulfill a standard definition of games and therefore suck? Or just that they didn’t entertain you sufficiently and therefore suck?
The second. Hey, I did say I had nothing to add here, right?
Heh. No worries. I just wanted to be sure I understood you. Thanks.
I just said what the message is. It’s schlock that everyone pontificates endlessly about. The game itself isn’t art, but everyone’s pathetic attempts to mystify it are.
I think the author’s focus on a score is more surprising. “GET GIRLFRIEND + EXPLORE + COLLECT WEALTH THEN DIE” isn’t as much a view on the human condition as it is a moral imperative.
Wow. I can’t believe that’s all you saw there. For example, you don’t have to take the girlfriend and if you do, it changes what paths you can take. Also, to me, wealth (money) isn’t even in the game. As much as I disagree with you, it’s cool to see your perspective on it. Thanks.